4
system are involving morphological influence and syntactic influence, 2 the influence of target languageL2 English li
nguistic system to the students’ IL system are involving morphological influence and syntactic influence, 3 the total
number of L1 Indonesian influence percentage is 32.5 consisting of morphological influence 20.37 and syntactic influence 12.4, 4 the total
number of L2 English influence percentage is 67.47 consisting of morphological influence 55.32 and syntactic influence 12.4 and 5 the
ratio of L1 Indonesian influence to L2 English influence is 1:2.07.
Keywords: Interlanguage, vulnerability, second language acquisition, applied
linguistics
A. Introduction
Development of technology and science demands us to perceive worldwide information. Nowadays the role of English is very crucial, for instance in making
use of technology and in holding worldwide communication, therefore, English competencies must be acquired wisely. However, English is not easy to acquire
that emerges of errors cannot be avoided. Students‟ linguistic system which contain errors influenced by other linguistic system and which is still imperfect is
called interlanguage IL. The errors emerg ed in the students‟ linguistic system is
the result from both students‟ native language in this case, Indonesian linguistic system and target language in this case, English linguistic system being learned
itself. The term “interlanguage” was first coined by Selinker 1997:155 to refer to
the students‟ linguistic system which has its own characteristics—different from both the students‟ native language L1 linguistic system and target language L2
linguistic system. He then confirms that interlanguage IL as a universal phenomenon and that interlanguage is the product of interaction between two
linguistic systems, namely L1 system and L2 system. Thus, interlanguage IL is the reflection of the attempt of the students in internalizing a linguistic system
they are learning. According to Nemser 1971:116, “Interlanguage” has its own system, which is approximative in nature.
There are three major characteristics of interlanguage IL system according to Adjémian 1976:298-311, namely: its systematicity, vulnerability, and
fossilization. The first characteristic of IL system is its systematicity. IL system is
5
systematic and is having consistent rule and feature. The second characteristic of IL system is its vulnerability Adjémian prefers to use the ter
m „permeability‟ toward infiltration or influence of linguistic elements from both native language
L1 system and the target language L2 system. The last characteristic of interlanguage is its fossilization. Selinker 1988:92 confirms that if the
char acteristic of interlanguage is being disappeared, then someone‟s interlanguage
system tends to be fossilized. In other words, fossilization of IL system can possibly be occurred if the interlanguage system is no longer developing towards
the L2 system. From the above description of the characteristics of IL, the researcher is
interested in exploring the second characteristic of IL —the vulnerability of IL
system. In specific, the researcher investigates to what extend the infiltration or influence of native language Indonesian system and target language English
system to the Indonesian learners of English‟s IL system. Consequently, as one of the most qualified schools in Surakarta, the researcher picks the students of SMP
Muhammadiyah 1 Surakarta as the subject of the current research and the compositions written by them as the object of the research. The researcher, in
particular, picks English compositions written by two classes of the students at grade VIII as sample representing the whole students‟ population in the school.
As examples of how IL vulnerability is, the researcher takes several erroneous sentences which are taken from the students‟ compositions:
1.
To arrive we around about Jogja City to climb andong carriage.
2.
[...] my friends and I have lounce at canten and studying with they,
3.
My activities in Everyday don’t difference with school child my age.
Through the errors committed, it can be seen that the sentences above are influenced by native languageL1 Indonesian and target languageL2 English
system. These prove the vulnerability of the students‟ interlanguage IL system to the influence of L1 and L2 system; therefore the language system is neither
English nor Indonesian. The emergence of grammatical errors as well as contextual unacceptability in
the above sentences is the result of the influence or infiltration of students‟ native
6
language system Indonesian and the target language system English. The first and the third sentence show that the students‟ IL system is being influenced by
Indonesian system; therefore they utilize word-for-word translation from Indonesian into English in order to convey their intended meanings. While the
second sentence portrays the student‟s problem in English parallel construction implying that their IL system are being influenced by the English rule application
itself. The above phenomenon of second language acquisition SLA describes the
students‟ language systems which are still developing. In engaging with this type of SLA study especially the IL study, the researcher considers several necessary
frameworks used as tools to deal with the data in the research. Those are interlanguage IL theory, error analysis EA framework and linguistics. The
whole studies dealing with the vulnerability of interlanguage system to the influences of other linguistic systems are being clarified in the current research.
The researcher believes that utilizing Error Analysis EA framework in the research is an effective way to deal with data in the absence of a suitable
analytical framework in IL. As what Cook 1993:112 believes that EA alone does not provide a sufficient de
scription or explanation of learner‟s language, but it has a significant contribution to make as part of an analysis. Therefore, the researcher
uses the EA framework arranged by Shridar, James, and Corder to analyze the erroneous sentences found in the stu
dents‟ compositions as the reflection of the L1 and L2 influences. Furthermore, the researcher uses the interlanguage IL
theory proposed by Selinker, Adjémian, Ellis and Corder to recognize the touch of influence from both Indonesian and English system t
o the students‟ IL system displayed in the students‟ English compositions.
The focus of the present study is the influences of both L1 Indonesian and L2 English system to the IL system as reflected on the erroneous sentences
found in the students‟ English compositions which are collected from grade VIII students of SMP Muhammadiyah 1 Surakarta. In short, the discussion of the
research is being narrowed down into one of the IL system characteristics —its
vulnerability to L1 and L2 system. The research elaborates the errors found by
7
using linguistic category taxonomy by Burt, Dulay, and Krashen. The researcher investigates the influences reflected o
n those errors by making use of Selinker‟s and other linguists‟ theory of IL. Based on the background of the study, the
researcher puts the research title Vulnerability of Interlanguage System: A Case Study of Students Learning English as a Foreign Language in SMP
Muhammadiyah 1 Surakarta.
B. Research Method
